How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

ISW's assessment of Russian manpower in the southern region:

The composition of Russian defensive positions in southern Ukraine and the ambiguities about how Russian forces are manning and equipping them continues to obscure how the next phase of fighting will transpire. ISW recently assessed that a lack of observed uncommitted Russian forces in the area may suggest that a subsequent series of Russian defensive positions may be less heavily defended than the positions that Ukrainian forces already penetrated to the north, although this remains unclear.[10] Russian forces have reportedly conducted additional lateral transfers to the Robotyne area with elements of the 76th Guards Air Assault (VDV) Division from the Kreminna area in Luhansk Oblast and are also reportedly redeploying unspecified elements from the Kherson direction to the area.[11] Russian forces committed elements of the 7th VDV Division immediately to combat after laterally transferring them to the Robotyne area in early August, although the Russian command could decide to commit these new reinforcements to strengthen the next series of defensive positions south of the current Ukrainian advance.[12] Russian forces committed a considerable amount of materiel, effort, and manpower to hold the series of defensive positions that Ukrainian forces are currently penetrating, and it is unclear if Russian forces will retain the advantages they have held if they cannot commit the same level of resources and personnel to these next layers of defense.[13] The next Russian defensive layer will, nevertheless, very likely pose significant challenges for the Ukrainian advance.

At times I think their weekend crew just reads the board, and thereby makes it out of the office for the last brunch seating.

[Anon052]

I found this article about the problems of NATO training of ukrainian troops very interesting.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-russia-training-nato-west-military/

 

[Teufel]

Figuratively speaking of air planes and crashes, not suggesting he predicted anything. Just very funny coincidence between his description of the Russian state of affairs.

But then earlier he did voice death wishes out of frustration with the MoD and the President of the Federation. 

 

Edited August 28, 2023 by Teufel

[Teufel]

Plenty of discussions on Tokmak but fighting is also continuing further east, just tidbit from post covering Tokmak as well.

From Tom Cooper’s ally Donald Hill at https://www.facebook.com/donald.hill.543

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Anon052 said:

I found this article about the problems of NATO training of ukrainian troops very interesting.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-russia-training-nato-west-military/

 

That rings true. Not sure if every Ukrainian soldier receiving training feels this way but there is some truth to what this is saying.  Last time we trained for this sort of war would have been in the early 90s.  Last time anyone saw one like it would have been mid-late 90s.  Most western troops of the last 20 years are “unshelled” by this wars standards.  The Ukrainian recruits really need the old Cold War training we used to do but there are damned few left in service who remember it.  I am pretty sure western troops are swinging their training back towards peer conventional conflict but it is largely theoretical for western forces at this point.

[akd]

7 hours ago, Fenris said:

Post says this is a pair of UKR T series tanks doing shoot and scoot.  One is very nearly hit by return fire at the 1:30 mark.  Thankfully they both appear to bug out successfully.

Posting as a link because all these tweets are flagged as restricted.  There's nothing R18+ in this one.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1695494020015726875

Crazy.  Looks like the HEAT jet actually hit the side of the tank.

[Armorgunner]

2 hours ago, akd said:

Crazy.  Looks like the HEAT jet actually hit the side of the tank.

Even more crazy is, that it looks like the missile came from behind. Detonated at the tank, in the front right side. And the HEAT-jet continued into the wall in front of the road.

Probably becaouse the tank is reversing, suddenly stops and starting to go forward again. And by that time, the missile was already launched?

Edited August 28, 2023 by Armorgunner

[Bulletpoint]

14 minutes ago, Armorgunner said:

Even more crazy is, that it looks like the missile came from behind. Detonated at the tank, in the front right side. And the HEAT-jet continued into the wall in front of the road.

Probably becaouse the tank is reversing, suddenly stops and starting to go forward again. And by that time, the missile was already launched?

I think it's the other way around - a HEAT shell coming from the front, hitting the wall, and the jet then continuing on, grazing the tank.

[Armorgunner]

24 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think it's the other way around - a HEAT shell coming from the front, hitting the wall, and the jet then continuing on, grazing the tank.

Nope, dont think so. If you draw a straight line forward, along the line of the blast. There is nothing there. No smoke, no blast, nothing that it could been fired from. I´v looked in slowmotion (picture by picture) like 30 times now. It is nothing in the line there. But if you find something, point it out. And I stand corrected.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Armorgunner

[cesmonkey]

Time to denigrate the importance of capturing Rabotino:

https://t.me/SolovievLive/205513
 

Quote

Rabotino is a small settlement, 800 meters deep and 400 meters wide. This is the nearest settlement on the road to Tokmak, in the forefield, and not on the main line of defense. According to the calculations of the NATO strategists who created the counteroffensive plan, it should have passed fairly quickly. The Armed Forces of Ukraine intended to go further through Novoprokopyevka and Sladkaya Balka to Tokmak, then to Melitopol, on the coast of the Sea of Azov and to the Crimea.

Alexander Matyushin , war correspondent, senior lieutenant of the UNM DPR, on air SolovyovLIVE

 

[Jr Buck Private]

11 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Like to see what twit suggested “stop using UAS so much”.  Right, much better to send men forward to die while being spotted by the other sides UAS.

Yeah, that was an odd comment from the US.   With drones getting better and better I've almost wondered if that recon patrol stuff was getting a bit obsolete.    

[Vanir Ausf B]

5 hours ago, Anon052 said:

I found this article about the problems of NATO training of ukrainian troops very interesting.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-russia-training-nato-west-military/

 

Meshes with a (paywalled) FT article noting the language barrier is a significant issue:

_____________

Teaching inexperienced soldiers how to operate a tank on the front line in just six weeks was never going to be easy.

But when German, Dutch and Danish officers gathered in a lush green patch of the North German countryside to train Ukrainian men, they were not expecting a shortage of competent interpreters to be the top issue.

“Interpreters are challenge number one,” said Martin Bonn, a Dutch brigadier general who is deputy head of the multinational EU training mission launched last November to educate Ukrainians on a range of weapons and tactics. Kyiv and western capitals are providing translators, who often struggle with the necessary vocabulary.

“The big challenge is the translation of words used in a military or technical context . . . Words no one uses in everyday life,”

European trainers were full of praise for the “tremendous motivation” of the recruits, despite the stress of the brutal war they are fighting and the daily dangers to friends and family back home.

But they also said that the age and ability of the soldiers they are sent varies wildly, as Ukrainian commanders on the front line are often unwilling to spare their best men. One volunteer who turned up in Germany was 71 years old.

https://www.ft.com/content/5bcb359e-f0ae-475d-9773-b89c0ebe0a1b

[Teufel]

Article from CNN suggesting that Russia is paying heavy price for the war in Ukraine. Literally sinking themselves into hole that decreasing oil prices are unable to cover. Frozen foreign reserves have torpedoed the war chest and soon comes the question, who will lend them money to keep them afloat. Approaching point where borrowing may be necessary to keep state running. Those imposing sanctions will not purchase Russian bonds, no matter the interest, private equity can’t invest even if wanting from participating countries.

Very interesting to see who will purchase such assets when Russia comes offering. Transactions can’t be hidden in explanations of non-military actions. China, India, et al. will simply openly support Russia financially knowing that money is going directly into bankrolling the Russian military spending. No providing direct military support you say?

Question is not if it will happen but rather what will the West do when that happens. My best guess is simply nothing, arguing that can’t prove allocation of borrowed money paying for military expenses.

Let’s not get into legal arguments about causality and what level of evidence is needed to actually impose any type of punishment. The West will never impose any kind of penalty for directly aiding Russian aggression against Ukraine by helping financially. We are doing so ourselves through purchase of primarily gas and oil from Russia. Through proxy or not.

As always, threats are only as good as the likelihood of being realized. China knows this, so does India and everyone else for that matter.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/28/economy/russia-military-spending-economic-impact/index.html

Edited August 28, 2023 by Teufel

[The_Capt]

22 minutes ago, Jr Buck Private said:

Yeah, that was an odd comment from the US.   With drones getting better and better I've almost wondered if that recon patrol stuff was getting a bit obsolete.    

Its right up there with "be more manoeuvre-y!" and use mission command.  We in western militaries have not been in a fight like this since maybe Korea.  One cannot manoeuvre across obstacle belts kms deep.  This is a straight up grudge attritional match until breakthrough.  I am sure the UA has made mistakes but this continual stream of "well if you just did it like us" nonsense is both arrogant and completely disconnected from realities they are facing on the ground.

UAS are integral to recon and SA building now.  This would be like advocating to "rely on radios less" in this environment.  The second I read that I thought that this was either some very oblivious US government hack, or a misinformation campaign.

[billbindc]

6 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Its right up there with "be more manoeuvre-y!" and use mission command.  We in western militaries have not been in a fight like this since maybe Korea.  One cannot manoeuvre across obstacle belts kms deep.  This is a straight up grudge attritional match until breakthrough.  I am sure the UA has made mistakes but this continual stream of "well if you just did it like us" nonsense is both arrogant and completely disconnected from realities they are facing on the ground.

UAS are integral to recon and SA building now.  This would be like advocating to "rely on radios less" in this environment.  The second I read that I thought that this was either some very oblivious US government hack, or a misinformation campaign.

What's always interesting about these quotes is that they are always anonymous and you simply never hear them in real life. Add in that you also never hear them in any sort of context and they have all the hallmarks of clickbait rather than straight reporting. I personally do not actually believe "Hey, drones dude...not prime." is the sort of thing that's being discussed by the respective military commands.

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, Armorgunner said:

Nope, dont think so. If you draw a straight line forward, along the line of the blast. There is nothing there. No smoke, no blast, nothing that it could been fired from. I´v looked in slowmotion (picture by picture) like 30 times now. It is nothing in the line there. But if you find something, point it out. And I stand corrected.

I'm no military expert, but it seemed to me that the shot came from off-camera to the right. The shooter is probably a tank in the dark treeline visible at 1:25.

[The_Capt]

40 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I personally do not actually believe "Hey, drones dude...not prime." is the sort of thing that's being discussed by the respective military commands.

In the circles I swim in this is definitely not the sentiment.  A lot of freaking out on the impact unmanned is having, and will continue to have but no one is saying "Hey you know what?  Dial back on the UAS and send more people forward."  In this day and age any field commander that decided to do recce by troops and keep the UAS parked is not long for command (and maybe life given the circumstances).  Of course if one does not have UAS or can't substitute other systems like GSR you might be forced to go old school but the idea of send the guys forward to poke bushes as the primary mode of recon in this environment is absurd.

[Armorgunner]

24 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm no military expert, but it seemed to me that the shot came from off-camera to the right. The shooter is probably a tank in the dark treeline visible at 1:25.

If you take a ruler, and line it to the Heat jet-line. There is no out of sight in the clip. Pause the clip at 1:34, and look picture by picture. By 1:35 the hit occours. Freez there and take a ruler, you have free terrain to a very far distance.

https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1695494020015726875?s=20

Edit: its only on the picture in akd´s post, you don´t see long enough to the top right.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Armorgunner

[billbindc]

6 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

In the circles I swim in this is definitely not the sentiment.  A lot of freaking out on the impact unmanned is having, and will continue to have but no one is saying "Hey you know what?  Dial back on the UAS and send more people forward."  In this day and age any field commander that decided to do recce by troops and keep the UAS parked is not long for command (and maybe life given the circumstances).  Of course if one does not have UAS or can't substitute other systems like GSR you might be forced to go old school but the idea of send the guys forward to poke bushes as the primary mode of recon in this environment is absurd.

Same. I constantly hear variations of "We really need to learn from the UA not just to help them there but to deter China over Taiwan". You simply wouldn't be taken seriously if you said anything else. 

Nothing new to this sort of thing of course (the below is from the UP, May 1943):

 

 

[Bulletpoint]

12 minutes ago, Armorgunner said:

If you take a ruler, and line it to the Heat jet-line. There is no out of sight in the clip.

True, the line intersects the horizon just inside the picture frame. But I think it might be perspective playing in, as we're seeing a 3D scene on a 2D screen.

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

In the circles I swim in this is definitely not the sentiment.  A lot of freaking out on the impact unmanned is having, and will continue to have but no one is saying "Hey you know what?  Dial back on the UAS and send more people forward."  In this day and age any field commander that decided to do recce by troops and keep the UAS parked is not long for command (and maybe life given the circumstances).  Of course if one does not have UAS or can't substitute other systems like GSR you might be forced to go old school but the idea of send the guys forward to poke bushes as the primary mode of recon in this environment is absurd.

This is why I think the reporter f'd up whatever the source was saying.  I can picture some officer, who is not familiar with explaining complex military ops to uniformed civilians, saying something that a journalist could misinterpret and then (worse) have an Editor make even worse.  Like the game of telephone where each person passes on a message and at the end it's all nonsense.

The only thing I can think of is someone saying that UAVs are not a complete substitute for recon in force operations.  That drones have their limitations in that they can miss finding enemy positions which a traditional ground recon move would have discovered.  Or that drones can't capture people so as to gain insights into the overall defense of the area.  Or a well placed and times recon op on the ground could trigger the enemy to do something prematurely.

So yeah, I can see all kinds of legit reasons to suggest that there's still a strong role for traditional recon and that relying too heavily on drones is suboptimal.  It might still be a comment that isn't in keeping with the reality of the nature of the battles Ukraine is fighting now, but at least we wouldn't think the source should be put in irons and thrown into the brig for a few weeks to give the person some time to contemplate if a military career is really for them.

Steve

[Armorgunner]

2 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

True, the line intersects the horizon just inside the picture frame. But I think it might be perspective playing in, as we're seeing a 3D scene on a 2D screen.

Could be so? But I still don´t bellive so. There is quite a margin at distance to the right. There is a very flat trajectory on the missile/rocket/shell. The trace of the shell that the prime tank fires the second before impact, looks the same. That one detonates at the same time itself got the hit. I still belive its a blue on blue, but with a happy ending (Nooo, not the happy one you nasty boys thinking of )

[The_Capt]

9 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The only thing I can think of is someone saying that UAVs are not a complete substitute for recon in force operations.  That drones have their limitations in that they can miss finding enemy positions which a traditional ground recon move would have discovered.  Or that drones can't capture people so as to gain insights into the overall defense of the area.  Or a well placed and times recon op on the ground could trigger the enemy to do something prematurely.

Well at least not yet.  The key advantage of remote unmanned is the lack of danger for the operator.  Doing stuff up close and personal turns every German tank into a Tiger and every 20 bad guys into a Division.  You definitely need to get up close and personal to take prisoners, take physical intel/SSE and get the human sense of what is going on at ground level. However, as we have seen in this war, everyone is leading with unmanned to give an objective birds eye and then sends in close recon - hopefully after arty has killed a bunch of enemy caught by UAS.

Finally, UAS are just one component of a massive ISR architecture at play in Ukraine right now.  From boots and eyeballs in the dirt to space.  Focusing on a single capability as the "reason" for anything is the hallmark of someone who really does not understand the business.  Like you say could very well be taken out of context.

[Seedorf81]

Reuters:

"Russian planned joint strategic excercise, ZAPAD 23 scheduled for september, highly likely canceled. Reason: too few troops and equipment available." Source British MoD.

[dan/california]

42 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is why I think the reporter f'd up whatever the source was saying.  I can picture some officer, who is not familiar with explaining complex military ops to uniformed civilians, saying something that a journalist could misinterpret and then (worse) have an Editor make even worse.  Like the game of telephone where each person passes on a message and at the end it's all nonsense.

The only thing I can think of is someone saying that UAVs are not a complete substitute for recon in force operations.  That drones have their limitations in that they can miss finding enemy positions which a traditional ground recon move would have discovered.  Or that drones can't capture people so as to gain insights into the overall defense of the area.  Or a well placed and times recon op on the ground could trigger the enemy to do something prematurely.

So yeah, I can see all kinds of legit reasons to suggest that there's still a strong role for traditional recon and that relying too heavily on drones is suboptimal.  It might still be a comment that isn't in keeping with the reality of the nature of the battles Ukraine is fighting now, but at least we wouldn't think the source should be put in irons and thrown into the brig for a few weeks to give the person some time to contemplate if a military career is really for them.

Steve

I think there is at least some evidence that parts of the U.S. Military are absorbing the lessons of Ukraine faster than others. The_Capt has detailed at some length how specific branches and specialties will argue that they already the solution to the challenges the Ukrainian battlefield makes evident, and that heir branch/specialty shouldn't lose ay budget.

Exhibit A for this in the U.S. is the decison to proceed with a n EXTREMELY expensive scout helicopter in the face of enormous evidence that trying to fly forward of your own forward lines, or even with a couple of kilometers of them is suicidal. Indeed the army has been ignoring such evidence since 2003 if not before.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2023/04/19/future-army-recon-helicopter-will-still-need-pilots-study-finds/

https://conference.defensenews.com/speaker/brigadier-general-walter-t-rugen

Oddly enough the general making this decision spent his entire career as an army helicopter pilot, or in command of army helicopter operations. I have no doubt whatsoever that he is a skilled and dedicated officer, but I am a wee bit wary that he has some filters that might be a little too rigid. You don't need an extremely expensive new airframe too launch ATGMS, and drones from ten or twenty kilometers behind the front lines. Personally I question if you need an aircraft for that job, all, but a use case can be made for a force that might have to deploy somewhere unexpected quickly. But flying a manned helicopter forward against any thing resembling competent opposition is suicide now, and it isn't going to get anything but worse. The general, and again I don't question his motives or patriotism might just be looking at the problem through the wrong lens, and he probably is not the only one in the Pentagon with similar issues.